Bill Clinton rocks Florida for Obama: We have to elect a President that will rebuild the American dream
By John Amato Tuesday Sep 30, 2008 4:45pm
Bill Clinton gave a blistering endorsement of Barack Obama's leadership at a huge rally in Ft. Pierce, Florida today.
Download | play 
Download | play
Clinton: We have to elect a President that will rebuild the American dream, repair a badly shattered financial system and restore America's standing in the world. Look at the mess that we have in our financial system. This is not accidental folks. It doesn't have to be this way. It matters who the President is, it matters what decisions he makes and it matters what the policies are. Obama's got better answers. He knows what it will take to get this country back on track.
Obama's answers are better!
Bill Clinton explains the financial crisis and how Obama will be able to grow the economy and lead America back like no other.
Login or Register to post comments.
This endorsement sounded most sincere.
I'm glad for that.
I fucking hate Bill Clinton. He is no progressive...here is proof!
(mmm pssst. not to be a spoil sport but how about rebuilding my reality before we rebuild my idea of an Am. dream?)
An excellent speech. Good to see/hear BC finally coming around.
'Bout damn time, sez I.
hrumph, the Clintons are fair weather friends. Not a peep over the rough spots, now that Obama opens it up in Florida, there's Bill "rockin'" it for Obama... sheesh, these self-servers only show up when it is safe and to take credit for other people's accomplishments. Can anyone cite 5 examples of them meaningfully helping Obama since the nomination? Not to sound so "what have you done for me lately" but seriously, nothing until Obama has already turned it around? Yikes...
What happened to his evil twin who's been campaigning for McCain all these weeks?
Bill Clinton was the man when he was in office regarding deficits/surpluses in the Budget..
http://blogs.venturacountystar.com/greenberg/qqxsgFiscalConservative.jpg
Great Graphic to pass along to friends when the opportunity arises...
let's reelect Bill.
Re: Leadership @ 2
Well, yeah, he's not on the far left fringe.
Re: Leadership @ 4
Sick.
OT: Damn, just read "on line" reporting by NYT's that Obama has returned to D.C. and
is supporting the new/revised "Bail Out Plan". He spent 36 minutes in one speech "on the
road" this morning giving his support to Plan, and another 13 minutes on the U.S. Senate
floor doing the same. That is NOT the position of the majority of Americans, and I am
disappointed in Obama for indicating he will vote "Aye". Piss poor decisions in my opinion.
Feh, I think that Bill needs to unload on McCain for quoting him out of context in his ad. Back stabbing at its finest, particularly after the Global Initiative invitation...
But yeah, the timing seems a little suspicious. Still, to quote Harry Truman, I'd rather have him in the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. Goes double for Hillary.
it's about friggin' time.i was yelling obcenities at the tv during his last few interviews.he came off as really bitter and angry and jealous.i'm glad he's turned it around...
peaceful easy feeling @ 11:
Doesn't Progressive=Far Left Fringe?
Bill Cinton....
Supported NAFTA
Supported the Telecom Bill of '96
Let Rwanda drown in blood
Let East Timor drown in blood
Bombed civilians in Serbia and the Sudan
And was the best Republican President since Eisenhower!
I can't but think to myself that Bill's been looking at the recent polls and decided that he wanted to be part of the winning team.
I listened to recording of both Obama's Speech today and Clintons.
Both were inspiring, both asked the American people to be part of the recovery of the nation. Remember, the bush administration and all the pro-deregulation crowd never asked anything of the American People. That is unless you call "Go out and go shopping" as bush said after we were hit in NY.
Their premise is good, put Americans to work restoring Americas infrastructure. Ask young people to participate, to donate a year or so of their lives as Kennedy did. People want to be involved, but this administration had made Americans feel as if they had no say and could do nothing but run up their credit card bills.
And now the polls are starting to show a pretty steady uptick for Obama, even in Florida and Ohio and Michigan.
There still is hope for our country as long as we get out the vote and elect as many D's as possible.
The Clintons are corporate cronies...bought and paid for - Republican lite - Bill was all against NAFTA, until he was elected. Lied himself into the Presidency did he.
Hey! He used the Post Turtle!
"Better answers"? Like what? $700 Billion for his buddies on Wall Street?
This coming from the guy who signed the most far-reaching deregulation of the banking industry since 1929.
To hell with Bubba...Robert Rubin's first sock puppet!!
(Guess who's the second???)
I guess that nasty ad, quoting him, finally motivated him...
Well Bill can still give a good speech. This did sound more sincere and energetic though...and I am glad.
Imagine if there were no term limits and we could have had him for the eight instead of he who shall not be named?
BTW: I am against term limits, they are fundamentally undemocratic.
John Amato, you are an Obama Kool Aid drinker...
Clinton was succinct and and emphatic. Hope Biden will be.
Doggiebobo @ 12:
Bush already asked the Federal Reserve Board to release this money. The Federal Reserve Board agreed to do it. The fact is; Bush already has his grubby paws on the money. Hopefully, Obama will be able to attach some oversight to this. Otherwise, I am sure it will all disappear through the cracks.
Does Senator Obama's plan have anything to do with "regulating" the Fed?
Because no one ever talks about regulating the Fed. Why is that?
They were the ones that kept interest rates low, despite the fact that conventional wisdom dictated RAISING interest rates. Also, how do we regulate the politicians, who obviously put pressure on the Fed to keep the good times rolling?
Folks, you can talk all day about this an that, but if we don't address the basic problem with our currency, fractional-reserve banking and floating currency, then we're just going to be pissing up a rope.
On the down low.....
The McCain Campaign is pushing rumors of an Obama gay sex scandal big time in Michigan. The rumor about Larry Sinclair has been debunked a long time ago... and Sinclair has revealed himself to be a con artist... but that isn't stopping McCain's supporters from pushing this rumor.
They are planning to crash a rally in Grand Rapids.
It's just more proof of how low the GOP is willing to go.
Derek from Chicago @ 22:
Derek, here's a clue for you ...... this is a progressive Blog.
Johnny2Bad @ 20:
I really wish people would do their research on things before making what amounts to seriously misleading, if not false accusations....especially wrt Graham-Leach-Bliley. Read this:
Derek from Chicago @ 22:
Say what you want about JA, but he isn't drinking Obama kool aid. He is a Hillary supporter that knows Obama can win.
He is too busy with Buffy and the Yankees to drink kool aid.
Bill Clinton gave a blistering endorsement of Barack Obama’s leadership
Is that good? :)
The old saying, Better late than never, comes to mind. Florida is teetering on the brink between Obama and McCain. If Bill's words can give Obama some help, well shit, I'll take it.
He sounded like his old self. I think he really was fired up and ready to go.
Leadership @ 14:
Don't forget Carnivore started under Clinton which later evolved into TIA. And remember, if you are to the left of Mussolini, you are officially (far*10^1000) left, this message brought to you by our media overlords and such luminaries as dildo and insanity.
pissed off patricia @ 30:
Ugh.
bill, the great deregulater
Bill Clinton: good for America?
Don't think so.
He stood by while the stock market went wild.
And sold American manufacturing abroad.
I don't care about the blowjob. That was Bill Clinton, and Hillary.
Just, fuck Bill Clinton. He's history. And worthless.
kray28 @ 21:
Jut like campaign finance cluster-F free-for-all..."fundamentally undemocratic".
Johnny2Bad @ 19:
say it aint so joe!
Johnny2Bad @ 32:
Is that your opinion? If so, you are welcome to it.
ray pateen @ 13:
Bingo.
Remember, Bill is a politician. He has a legacy he wants protected, he'd love to see Hillary get more attention in the national spot light since it would keep him there. But in the end he is a Democrat.
Keep this up Bill. You're legacy is watching.
"The dead have risen and they're voting Republican!" -- Bart Simpson
Hey, I thought some liberals believed that Clinton wanted McCain to win?
Anyhow, fuck you idiots who say fuck Bill Clinton. I'm tired of the purists, tired of the whiners on the left, or who claim to be on the left, who seem content to sneer at Clinton and even Obama because they don't hold the same exact suite of beliefs.
And I thought rightwingers lived in a fantasy world.
When it comes to the totality of a candidate's beliefs, including foreign policy, the economy, the environment, the role of science, education, right on down the line, the Democrats far more often than not are the party of sanity.
You don't like that? Then vote Republican, or vote for a meaningless third party, or don't vote at all, but then don't come bitching when McCain kicks off and we are treated to Sarah Palin taking the oath of office.
Obama is a globalist just like McCain. The only difference is that McCain is a neocon and Obama is a socialist. Both of them will use the Constitution like it's a piece of toilet paper. Wake up, America. The two-party system is corrupt and deceiving you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WJynIeWkf4
Just yesterday I'd given up on the Clintons, convinced they'd rather see McCain win so Hilary could run in 2012.
finally, Bill should continue in FL, VA and NC and make sure to nab em for Obama
Derek from Chicago @ 22:
you like the chocolate drink and that's not hot cocoa.
ontheleftcoast @ 39:
True. The thing is that he is also a former President, and as such needs to maintain himself somewhat above the bareknuckled aspects of the campaign. I've never had problems with him not going full bore after McCain. If you listened to his convention speech and others, you'd know that he wants Obama to win. He keeps giving proof, yet that proof is never good enough for some people.
The thing is that, even if he gave a great speech in support of Obama every day between now and November 4, you'd still read critics from the left saying he's not doing enough.
A very powerful speech. Even when Bill says the same stuff as Barack, he comes across folksier and less rigid.
That said, Clinton signed the bill that repealed the Depression era firewall that prohibited bank holding companies from broadening into other investments (a Glass-Steagall provision).
It passed 90-8. The only Republican who voted against it was Shelby (R-AL). The only Democrats who voted against it were Boxer, Bryan, Dorgan, Feingold, Harkin, Mikulski and Wellstone. Dorgan in particular warned that the type of crisis we're now experiencing could happen in 10 years. He was off by one year.
There's no question that Bush and the Republicans fanned the flames.
But Clinton signed the bill that let people throw hay all around the barn.
Did Bill have his fingers crossed behind his back during the whole speech?
Nick @ 41:
Then fucking get off your ass and form a third party. What have you done to establish a third party during the past four years? Have you run as a third party candidate? How much time and money have you invested in formation of a third party? Or would you prefer to sit on the sidelines and snipe, and hope that someone else forms a third party for you?
What have the Greens and the Libertarians really done over the past decade toward establishing themselves as viable alternatives to Republicans and Democrats? What have they done to endear themselves to the typical American? Or the atypical American, for that matter.
If you want relevance, you've got to work for it.
castanea @ 40:
YOU JUST DON'T GET IT!
You're supposed to vote like true Americans like Johnny2Bad, who's supporting...he's supporting...uhm...a little help, Johnny2Bad, you're supporting...name's right there on the tip of my fingers- you've spelled it out clearly a million times.....
*snark off*
Andy K @ 49:
Truth.
pissed off patricia @ 38:
Wow. Thanks.
I find it interesting that people would gang up and say BC wasn't doing his part to get Obama elected.
This guy is the slickest politician since FDR. Maybe slicker.
He knew to buy his time and wait till it got later in the election.
Say what you will, I still like the guy.
castanea @ 45:
When the left gets crazy with itself I alway recall that old quote -- "I don't belong to an organized party, I'm a Democrat". I personally don't want the left to be in perfect agreement on everything. The fact that so many Rethuglicans are simple minded zombies isn't a good thing for their party. If they'd just do a recto-cranial extraction they'd see that the world is passing them by. But that is their problem.
"Why is it that nothing rhymes with orange, silver, and purple?"
Nick @ 41:
Globalism = Corporate ownership
Socialism = State ownership; like the post office.
How can something be state owned and corporate owned at the same time?
ummm;)
give me a call bill boy;)
Someone help me out here. I'm troubled.
Quoting from this article, apparently, the early pressure on Fannie Mae to ease credit restrictions and increase investment in subprime mortgages came from the Clinton administration over nine years ago. I hate to say it but a lot of the blame for the sub-prime mortgage crisis is being dumped on the Bush administration when it was clearly underway well before even the 2000 presidential election.
Now I'm all for dumping this all at the republican's doorstep but I can't very well do that when there was an article published before Bush had even been elected, let alone taken office.
So help me out here. What's the real story?
upchuck @ 54:
Fascism.
I will say that BC did a good thing today. His speech to rally the crowd was very good. But, I'm still keeping an eye on him and his wife. I'll be watching what they are going to do in the future.
Anyway, I'm just shocked that they didn't say that McCain was their friend. They say it in almost every speech and appearance they give.
------------------------------------------------------------------
On a brighter note, that speech that Obama gave in the Senate was spectacular. Those are the type of speeches I would love to hear while I watch C-SPAN when either the House or the Senate is in session.
Johnny2Bad @ 50:
Funny, it looks like a word I know, but- when it's got your spin on it- it reads "bullshit".
MrBigDog2U @ 56:
kray28 @ 28:
Does that explain it>
ontheleftcoast @ 53:
I don't want the left to be in agreement with itself on everything, either. My problem arises from the whens and wheres that our disagreements arise. Now is not the time to start intra-party squabbles, or to encourage the left to debate itself. We had all that in the primaries. The matter before us on which we need to focus is Obama vs. McCain.
And, honestly, the single thing that I envy about the rightwing is its ability to march in step when need be. The conventional wisdom seems to be that the Republicans will split apart after the election, especially if Obama wins. I don't believe that for a minute. They are all obedient enough to their masters that they'll stay in formation. I wonder sometimes if that's how they were bred.
Ron @ 57:
I think you need to brush up on your "isms".
MrBigDog2U @ 56:
Dig Here.
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm...
MrBigDog2U @ 56:
Bullshit. A vast majority of the defaulting sub-prime loans originated with thrifts and private mortgage banks. These companies knew exactly what they were doing and what was in it for them. Their entire business model was based on "legal loan sharking"....making loans to people with crappy credit and charging them ridiculous interest rates....a highly profitable enterprise, until the principal payments kick in.
How bout the greedy bastards start investing in America instead of themselves for the first time in 28 years.
Rather then bailing out Wall Street and CEO's try raising American Wages so people have purchasing power.
MrBigDog2U @ 56:
A "concern troll". OK, I've got this one. It's simple. Clinton was at the end of his term, a lame duck and wildly unpopular after the sham that was the Lewinski (there is a name I'd hope I'd never have to type again) scandal. Nobody wanted to be a Democrat -- the "stain" (ah, the jokes, the jokes) was too great. Phil Gramm forced the biggest pile of crap in the last 100 years into a bill at the end of the session that couldn't be voted against. Too many important good things were in it, it had to go thru. This was blackmail, pure and simple. Viola! Here we are roughly a decade later and all hell is breaking loose. How is this Bushie's fault? Well, he's the "Decider" isn't he? He could've decided to fix this mess when the mortgage problem started to head south 2 years ago. You sit in control of both houses (and if you say LIEberman is a Democrat I've got a bridge I'd like to sell you, you'll obviously believe anything) and the Presidency and you don't do anything about it. Yeah, it's your fault.
McPain/Quaylin didn't just jump the shark, they strafed it as well.
Fannie and Freddie have the ultimate guaranteer's (taxpayers-kids-grandkids) holding the bag for $5 Trillion.
They didn't tell us that did they.
How bout a New American Dream?
One based on quality and appreciation rather then junk toys, possessions, and debt.
Bwallace @ 34:
This was discussed elsewhere recently. Besides the fact that Clinton was more or less blackmailed (maybe too strong a word for what happened) into signing the bill after Gramm stuck in the deregulation, it was veto proof. and maybe he should have vetoed it and maybe that would have sent the wrong message and given the GOP more ammunition to keep Gore out of the white house but you know, hindsight is 20/20. Of course, Clinton could have done something unconstitutional like use the line item veto but after all it would hae been unconstitutional and an impeachable offense. Oh wait, W used the line item veto, whoops. once W got into office, he certainly didn't do anything to reverse it.
every time bill clinton talks lately i can't help but notice he sounds like he is worried that his dentures are going to fall out. has anyone else noticed this. i only mention it because it distracts me from what he is saying, and i think it distracts him too.
ontheleftcoast @ 65:
Thank You. You put that in it's proper prespective.
I was trying to figure out how to word it. Excellent job!
castanea @ 40:
Amen. Go vote for Nader. That sure worked out well in 2000.
castanea @ 60:
They've used this tactic for a while but I think the wheels are coming off that wagon. They started this with the "Silent Majority" tactics back in the 70's and it took them 20 years to pull it all together. Well, the "Silent Majority" has seen what it gets them: war, economic ruin, etc. They're going to have to come up with a new tactic now. The Libertarians can't stand the big-government-spending-to-make-my-cronies-rich types. The theocrats can't stand either of them. It's going to fracture and reform. My guess is we'll see some attempts to pull the old coalition together in 2012. But if they lose that election as well it will come completely undone with name calling and finger pointing and it will take a decade for them to come back. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Widespread @ 46:
Wow... In your own post you show that it passed by a VETO PROOF margin and then finish by stating that Clinton signed it into law...
Explain to us how Clinton could have avoided signing it since it passed by a VETO PROOF margin?
I'm waiting...
Szin @ 73:
That's funny? I thought it was 54 for it.
ontheleftcoast @ 65:
No, I'm not - really. I'm from Oregon and hoping that we'll deliver Merkley to the Senate so LIEberman becomes a non-issue.
If this is that whole Phil Gramm "omnibus spending package" thing, then I'm fine with that. I just needed confirmation that it was all related. The article specifically calls out "the Clinton administration" (which may just be a NYT way of saying things). That's what I was having the issue with.
That is the the Clinton I loved and worked for. He is so great! It sure took him a long time to come out for Obama. I guess he read the handwriting (numbers) on the wall. Hillary after one term of McCain is out of the picture. Now it is: endear yourself to the American people with your commitment and be available if anything happens to Obama. Biden will never run again, he might serve out a term but he will not run. Here comes Hillary.
Leadership @ 29:
Well, now that the Yankees have free time until next season, maybe he try a variety of drinks. (har har)
Go Rays!
Bill would win if he was running for President again.
mudshark @ 70:
That doesn't alleviate the blame that the corporate controlled Democrats should face. Just because it was a necessity doesn't mean you don't speak out against it. You can hold your nose for a bill and let your constituents know why it isn't good for them but there were politics is involved. And, true, we finally got the lower house back in '06 but not by a veto-proof majority. And yes, still there are too many pigs at the trough of special interests so real reform is tough. Obama's claim that he wants to shine the light on the federal budget will be a start but not if people don't pay attention to what gets found in there. All of us have to get off our rears and get involved. A democracy works when the people want it to. If you let driver by itself in cruise-control don't be surprised when it runs off the road.
ontheleftcoast @ 79:
People are going to have to be forced to get off their rears. Americans have it way too easy.
MrBigDog2U @ 75:
Sorry, the trolls have been thick on this blog of late. This is a standard framing from the right to pin the blame for this on Clinton. As I stated in some other comments. This is a complex mess and plenty of blame can go around on it. But make no mistake, this was the intent of the Gramm and his friends. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.
j0e @ 6:
If you were the Clintons and just lost millions of dollars to Obama, would you want to be his friend?
the bailout bill will pass this time as more pork, pork pork porks been added , snuffle snuffle oinkers!
How come they aren't being "bailed out"?
http://www.operationdignity.org/images/od_img_main.jpg
Man, I miss that sweet, oral-sex loving pervert.
tyree @ 83:
Yeah by the time Wall Street and Congress get finished dishing out the loot to each other we'll be stuck with a bill for $700 Billion.
L.A. Confidential @ 84:
Why are we bailing out these these guys?
http://www.boatbookings.com/temp/oasis-lurssen-1-main.jpg
Sickening
L.A. Confidential @ 86:
wrong ! they added another 150 billion in pork to the 700 billion for getting more votes! pork
let the great brain robbey begin!
man bush has got obama and mccain in washington convinced they can milk a bill by pulling on its pecker!
sorry bull
tyree @ 89:
Alright they are going to steal $850 Billion from the Suckers of America.
damit robbery
ontheleftcoast @ 81:
People have to remember who was in charge of congress at that time. And the atmosphere at that time.
They’ve used this tactic for a while but I think the wheels are coming off that wagon. They started this with the “Silent Majority” tactics back in the 70’s and it took them 20 years to pull it all together. Well, the “Silent Majority” has seen what it gets them: war, economic ruin, etc. They’re going to have to come up with a new tactic now. The Libertarians can’t stand the big-government-spending-to-make-my-cronies-rich types. The theocrats can’t stand either of them. It’s going to fracture and reform. My guess is we’ll see some attempts to pull the old coalition together in 2012. But if they lose that election as well it will come completely undone with name calling and finger pointing and it will take a decade for them to come back. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
The thought of watching an intra-party squabble between Republicans warms three of the four chambers of my heart. The fourth remains skeptical and has a "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude.
Nobody's perfect, I guess.
Why did CNN report Clinton was at Fort Pierce when C span said he was in Orlando at FCU?
I know it's the same place because of the two young ladies in the background.
Can't they get anything right anymore?
Leadership... and Obama agreed with John McCain six times during the debate! Obama believes in Jesus, just like Bush! Obama went to Harvard just like Bush! Obama agrees with NAFTA, doesn't he? Obama belongs to the same party as Clinton! Obama is for off shore oild drilling! Obama voted FOR immunity for the telecoms!
Spare us your selective absolutism.
wal-mart allows union in china
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/09/AR200608...
Nick @ 41:
you people need to stop thowing the word "socialist" around, since you have no fucking clue what it means
now go away little paulbot, you bother me
Re: Leadership @ 4 said:
Doesn't Progressive=Far Left Fringe?
_____
Not at all. You're misinformed about what that means. There is some excellent writing in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism
snip: "The term progressive was first widely used in late 19th century United States, in reference to a general branch of political thought which arose as a response to the vast changes brought by industrialization, and as an alternative both to the traditional conservative response to social and economic issues and to the various more or less radical streams of socialism and anarchism which opposed them."
So there.
so up until today, clinton was dread to even speak the name "obama"
wonder what got him into the chearleading mood....and no, it wasnt hillary
Cait @ 82:
They have no one to blame but themselves. Obama bent over backwards to be classy with them, even did the dishes in the "Kitchen Sink" and they show up now to try and take some credit for Obama turning it around in the polls. Grosses me out...
Britisher @ 98:
Yes! I like that phrase, "selective absolutism." I mean, I don't like what it represents, but as a descriptor for what I loathe, it is perfect.
Obama breathes air and so does McCain!
Etc.
I just love how people are so quick to lay blame on the Clintons for not stumping often enough for Obama. They don't have to do squat, yet they do. What crowds are you gathering to save this country from complete failure?
What struck me most about this speech was the contrast between Bill Clinton and G.W. Bush. Republicans have got be silently weeping themselves to sleep every night wondering how they could have been so wrong to put such a loser in power, yet they still haven't learned their lesson with a McSame/Pfailin' ticket.
And no, you cannot use my handkerchief. Gross.
j0e @ 6:
I don't know where to begin with these sorts of comments.
The only fair-weather friends I see are those who endlessly demonize the Clintons. It doesn't matter whether or not Bill Clinton was a good President, or that Hillary Clinton has dedicated countless hours to fighting for progressive causes. No. In the end, it all comes down to recent memory because this is a generation with pathetic attention spans.
I won't get into the history of Bill and Hillary Clinton, whom I am sure have done more for the country in a single day than, frankly, most of us will do in our lifetimes. Nor will I address the news media that was intent on turning Hillary Clinton into the villain of the constructed narrative, with Obama as champion. (Inevitably, they'd turn their sights on him too. People didn't want to believe what they heard about Obama, so they didn't. I guess Bill and Hillary Clinton weren't so lucky.)
This isn't to say that Hillary Clinton didn't cross the line here and there during the primaries, because I think she did. She campaigned too hard and too desperately, and it all came back to haunt her. Let's ignore that her campaign team was staffed by a few unwise choices, and look at simple reality: You get one shot to become President of the United States. And while it will always be easy for us to sit here in our armchairs or at our computers and bitch about how so-and-so is acting, can we really say that we wouldn't want to throw everything we had at our opponent, including the kitchen sink? Everything that the woman worked and fought for, having to claw her way to the top tooth-and-nail in the face of two decades of the endlessly-misogynistic Washington - it was all on the line. She buckled. Obama remained more or less steadfast. Thus, in the end, she lost the election. And that's all that she wrote for Hillary Clinton's chances of being President of the United States.
This isn't something that's going to be easy for her to swallow, or for Bill Clinton to swallow, but consider this: Hillary alone has done more to campaign for, and promote, Barack Obama than any other runner-up in the history of US politics. That doesn't tell you something? Her gracious speech, coupled with Bill Clinton's endorsement, at the Democratic National Convention didn't tell you something? Here's what you should have discovered: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were competing, vying for the same spot. But when all was said and done, things returned to normal, and the party became most important. This isn't about fair-weather friends - because what do Hillary and Bill get out of this? Hillary wasn't even offered a position within Obama's new administration. No, this is about party and about beliefs and about country.
Like it or not, Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton are putting their personal ambitions or desires aside for the sake of bigger, more important things. So what's your excuse for the pettiness and divisiveness?
j0e @ 104:
Man, you are full of it. It might not have been reported on some of the far-left blogs, but Obama wasn't always honest or classy. That's not to say that he was as 'bad' as Clinton was, but then, I doubt she was as bad as you think. A lot of what was reported of her was as disengenuous and misleading as some of the McCain attack ads are about Obama right now. But that's neither here nor there.
They aren't here to 'take credit' for anything. Stop projecting. Get over yourself.
I used to love Bill, but he is a changed man after his heart trouble. He is not as sharp and seems to take more things to heart. (its either that, or the evil twin theory)
I am glad he is giving these speeches, but it will take many more to make up for the traitorous comments he has made in the last month.
Meat @ 108:
This (series) of comments answers it self. Seems to Say a whole lot more about you and those you support. You do realize that it's pretty silly to call for and end to divisiveness while going on the attack and dredging up your specific grievances. Who's projecting what? The fact of the matter is after the Repub convention, the ticket was swinging in the wind, and we got some lack-luster help from Hillary who's biggest meme was "Not attacking Palin." Then Bill makes a series of interviews that some joked looked like Bill was doing anything he could to avoid complimenting or even saying Barack's name. Ineffectual and insincere. Now that the polls are back, strong, in places like Florida, who shows up giving a full-throated endorsement? Given your level of vitriol, I'd guess nothing I could say to you would penetrate your subjective framework, so I'll drop it. But don't kid yourself. The Clintons are in this for the Clintons, not the Party, and certainly not Obama. Let's see them help when the chips are down and there's a risk to their political future. We'll see some true colors then my friend.
Meat @ 108:
if hillary had won the primaries...was there anything that obama said that mccain couldve put into a commercial to cut her down?
i rest my fucking case
i am tired of the clintons
Floridiot @ 98:
It was Orlando and it's UCF (University of Central Florida).
Getting anything right? Well, I guess going to Obama's website and clicking the box with the BIG "Bill Clinton in Orlando" label was something that they missed. Hey, they're all so busy keeping up with McCain/Palin's latest antics.
I don't care why it happened, I just care that it did happen. People remember the Clinton years fondly. Things were good then for most people. If he can evoke those same emotions as something obtainable under an Obama presidency, than I'll take it.
Make up your mind Bill. Whose side are you on?
Bill Clinton is a fucking rock star. All of the blather on this string matters none. Hillary and Bill will do what they can to make sure John McCain isn't elected President. They are the ultimate party loyalists.
I am far more left than either Hillary or Bill, but I am also aware of how conservative much of America is. The fact is, Barack Obama is a far better candidate because Hillary stayed in the race. After a tough campaign he is a better debater and his campaign team is not lax or overconfident.
Anyone who is still bitter about Bill's decision on bank deregulation or anything else is living in the past. We have an election to win now.
It's great to finally see Bill doing his part. I hope he keeps it up in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and maybe even Arkansas...
SKdeA @ 18:
HaHA!!!
He must be reading these posts. I thought that was the best description of Palin i've ever heard of. How great would it have been if Clinton said all of it.
Did Anne Althouse give comment yet? Because there are some women behind President Clinton. Those women have breasts. I know Anne Althouse is very concerned about those things. Althouse! Breasts!
.
Bill Clinton says:
... And NOT hold those that ruined America's reputation accountable?
.
Am I the only one who heard what he DIDN'T say? I hear all sorts of smoldering resentment.
Good for him saying something good about Obama.
But here's what a real mensch would have said. "I personally endorse Obama... he's the right man, the right person, someone we can trust and who will not let us down."
Instead he endorsed his policies, his advisers, etc. He never really endorses Obama as a human being. It's quite odd.
Get over it Bill. Hillary lost. You won't be betraying your wife by endorsing Obama.... at least not like the other times.
But what he's really doing is angling for his wife in 2012. There's just something nasty about those 2. I like them less out of office than I liked them in.
I agree with #3. Can't they stop yakking about the so-called "American Dream" and talk about reality (the "American Nightmare) instead?
Welcome back Bill, you were missed. Carley Simon said best for me describing this man .... "nobody does it better, makes me feel sad for the rest."
To quote a recent DeNiro/Pacino movie "He's like a pit bull on crack."
Szin @ 74:
You're waiting? Okay, here goes, you smug little twit.
Clinton was all for this bill. I remember when it was signed, he did not sign it against his will.
Can you show me instance where he expresses the kind of reservations and concerns Harkin and Dorgan had?
“This legislation is truly historic,” President Clinton told a packed audience of lawmakers and top financial regulators. “We have done right by the American people.”
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/clintons-financial-services-moderniza...
I'm not sure about reality, but Clinton certainly didn't have a liberal bias when he signed that bill into law.
We need more Bill Clinton's in this world. He truly cares about this country.
bill clint is a genius but he's got to be consistent supporting obama..dude is all over the map
mudshark @ 75:
Hi Mudshark.
You're partly right; the first version of the Senate bill was 54 Republicans for it and 44 Democrats against it (so the Republicans did not have a veto-proof majority).
But after the differences between House and Senate versions were ironed out in committee, the Senate vote on the final bill was 90 - 8 (House was 362 - 57).
God Bless You Bill Clinton. We miss you.
A belated note to Meat, post #107:
I made the mistake of skimming #107 for keywords, and reading post #108 and responding to that before reading #107. Your well-reasoned and measured response does not deserve the 'vitriol' label and I appreciate the objectivity of your analysis.
But may I add that the question is whether they are self-serving, not if their is a rationalization that excuses it. Obama wasn't my first choice, either. Whaddaya gonna do? A lot of us who came to support Obama in the primaries were outraged by the viciousness and sense of entitlement demonstrated by the Clintons. I am not really ready to forgive them, particularly when they seem to be operating, post-nomination (with the exception of the convention, which was still self-serving because any alternative was personally more damaging to them) for themselves, not the party. If I'd seen a similar speech two weeks ago, I might feel differently. But two weeks ago, Bill was visibly uncomfortable saying Obama's name. What subliminal signal is that sending to those who still respect him? At a critical juncture? That's actually the opposite of helping, and certainly not doing the most any defeated primary candidate has ever done for the eventual nominee...
Login or Register to post comments.